According to Florida law, doctors are generally required to inform patients of their diagnosis and the material risks associated with any proposed medical procedures under the doctrine of informed consent. This doctrine mandates that a physician must provide sufficient information to the patient to enable them to make an informed decision about their treatment. This includes explaining the nature and purpose of the proposed treatment, the risks involved, possible complications, and any alternative treatments. However, the law does not require physicians to disclose every possible risk, only those of a serious nature that a reasonably prudent physician would recognize as essential for the patient to make an informed decision:
In order to submit to a jury the issue of whether and to what extent specific risks of surgery should be disclosed to a patient in securing the patient’s informed consent to the procedure, evidence is required as to the nature and extent of the risks and of the standard prevailing in the medical community, i.e., whether a reasonable medical practitioner in the community would make such disclosure under the same or similar circumstances.
See: Ritz v. Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund, 436 So.2d 987.
Note: Florida Statute 765.101 (11), which relates to health care directives, defines informed consent as “consent voluntarily given by a person after a sufficient explanation and disclosure of the subject matter involved to enable that person to have a general understanding of the treatment or procedure and the medically acceptable alternatives, including the substantial risks and hazards inherent in the proposed treatment or procedures, and to make a knowing health care decision without coercion or undue influence.”
Related:
How do you know if you have a case for medical malpractice?
What is the hardest element to prove in medical malpractice?
_______________
Do you have questions or comments? Then please feel free to send Alan an email or call him now at (954) 458-8655.